I voted to remain in the European Union, and I still believe we'd be better off staying in.

But I’m not convinced by the arguments for holding a second referendum.

In fact, I fear that if the campaign for another vote on Brexit succeeds, we could end up in an even bigger mess than the one we’re in now.

Supporters of a second referendum don’t like to call it that. Instead, they talk about holding a People’s Vote.

It’s a masterful bit of marketing. And it’s been so successful that even Theresa May, the Prime Minister, used the phrase “People’s Vote” in the House of Commons, although only to explain why she was against it (she argued that we had our people’s vote back in 2016).

But there should be no doubt about what it means.

A People’s Vote would be a referendum on whether to accept whatever deal the UK Government manages to agree with the EU, or whether to reject it. But one option would be to cancel Brexit entirely.

In practice, it would be a second Brexit referendum, giving people a chance to reverse the decision taken in the first one.

People attend a bin Brexit rally in Victoria Square to coincide with the start of the Conservative Party Conference at the ICC (Image: Birmingham Mail)

Read More

After all, many voters genuinely didn’t know which option to choose, and wanted to hear the arguments. They were ready to listen.

There were a few cutting remarks. Memorable moments included remain-supporting MP Amber Rudd telling Leave campaigner Boris Johnson that he was the life and soul of the party, but “you can’t trust him to take you home at the end of an evening”.

There was, however, no talk of traitors or betrayal. That came after the referendum, as the UK began the tortuous process of negotiating an exit from the EU.

A second referendum will be far less pleasant.

People who support Brexit will be furious. And who could blame them?

MP Jess Phillips backs a People's Vote

They were asked for their opinion and they gave it. And they were assured at the time that their decision mattered - that the result of the referendum was final.

Holding a second referendum would mean they were lied to about that.

In practice, they would be told that they got it wrong the first time around, and now must try again.

Supporters of a second referendum point out that when people voted in 2016, they didn’t have a chance to endorse a specific Brexit deal.

However, it would be clear that a second referendum was really about reversing Brexit.

The idea that it was a public vote on the deal - which just happened to include the option of staying in the EU - would fool no-one.